Urban Caching

[Mr.Yuck]

Back into my blocked posters list. In you go, this won't hurt a bit. *PLONK*

 

I wasnt aware you could do that....THANK YOU!!!

found it and added my one and only name needed to it.

 

no more time wasted reading post after post of combative attitude. welcome to ignore!

 

Thank you! Of course you're probably not seeing this. You can see my avatar though. You like it? It's the U.S. Army Signal Corp Insignia.

 

on topic:

 

I believe urban caching has a finite amount of caches that can be done that have something resembling quality. At some point all the places worth visiting have a cache placed, so by default there is only the less desirable locations left to hide caches at. Its at that point "most" new caches in the city will likely not be worth hunting for unless homeless camps, parking lots, and random empty lots with garbage are what you like to see.

 

My town feels like its just about reached that point. So yes, I'll still be hunting old caches, but its not likely I'll be running out after any new micro/small that pop up, since I know what to expect.

 

I too subscribe to that theory. My area is certainly "running out" of places to hide caches. I know, I know, a creative person will always find a place for a great cache. But I could point you to a couple of local parks that had a couple of caches each from 2002-2005, one of which now has 15 (and it would be impossible to squeeze in another), and another large undeveloped park which is close to hitting 30!!

 

So I guess it would be impossible to not connect the rise of Urban Micros in my area to this saturation of large wooded parks with hiking trails.

[+mudsneaker]

edited that post, after realizing you might think that. sorry bout that.

someone else shares our ignore list.

[+tozainamboku]

I don't know why it is so hard for some people to accept that others see geocaching in fundamentally different way. Many of the new breed of cacher see this a simple hide-and-seek game. Location is not so important. For some numbers of finds are important. Caches place at a high density in an urban or suburban setting where you can drive to within a few feet of the cache most of the time are "better" than ones that take an hour to hike to. Many enjoy the fact that the cache is hidden right under the noses of thousands of muggle who are unaware of the secret. Some find it a challenge to look for caches when there are muggles around while others do their caching at night. Many of these cachers prefer the easy terrain - not just a few who may have disabilities. Some have little time to cache - a quick grab at lunch or when going out on errands is the only caching they have time for. And there are many cachers who prefer going on hikes or finding caches in interesting areas but who accept that some caches are hidden by people who cache for a different reason. These cachers will find the parking lot hides from time to time. Some accept them as a type of cache that someone likes, some will hold their nose and log a find anyhow, others may skip these when they realize it's not a cache they are interested in doing.

 

I'm going to stop reading my email because I get too much spam. Even with my spam filter, I still get spam. Guess there is no good email because there is too much spam, so I will stop reading my email now. I'll stop reading the Groundspeak forums too because we keep discussing the same old topics.

[+MN-CACHE-TRACKER]

The first lightpole skirt cache I found I thought was very cool -- I'd never seen it and didn't know you could hide stuff under there. It was also in the parking lot of a park, not a store, and it was the first stage of a multi that was in the park, not a micro cache unto itself. Now, though, I don't even bother with them.

 

The plus side is, now that I know about the skirts and most non-cachers don't, I've used them to hide my keys when I want to lock my car and don't want to carry them (e.g. jogging)

 

Here in Northren MN where there are 10000+ lakes 20000+ boat landings and miles and miles of woods to hide good caches in, we still get a few like this under the lamp pole skirt. The people around here who are looking under the skirts of the poles are 1- looking for a poorly hidden micro or 2- need to go somewhere and dont own a car of their own..

[Mr.Yuck]

I don't know why it is so hard for some people to accept that others see geocaching in fundamentally different way. Many of the new breed of cacher see this a simple hide-and-seek game. Location is not so important. For some numbers of finds are important.

 

I can tell you why it's so hard for some people to accept. And pretend for a moment, I'm not a raving Puritan. Pretend I'm Sbell111 or Snoogans or something. The reason is quite simple and plain to see; it's because it wasn't always like this!!! The people who find it hard to accept see it as a deterioration of the game. Sure, if you know, the 10th cache in the world in July 2000 was a keyholder on a guardrail, and half the hides after that were keyholders or film canisters, I'm sure there'd be no controversy at all today. Heck, If I myself just stumbled upon this website in say the Summer of 2006, and saw 40% of the caches in my area were in parking lots, I'm sure I'd be lifting every skirt in sight myself.

 

 

I'm going to stop reading my email because I get too much spam. Even with my spam filter, I still get spam. Guess there is no good email because there is too much spam, so I will stop reading my email now. I'll stop reading the Groundspeak forums too because we keep discussing the same old topics.

 

Oh fiddlesticks! See you tomorrow.

[Clan Riffster]

Many of the new breed of cacher see this a simple hide-and-seek game.

For some numbers of finds are important.

Many enjoy the fact that the cache is hidden right under the noses of thousands of muggle who are unaware of the secret.

Some find it a challenge to look for caches when there are muggles around

Many of these cachers prefer the easy terrain - not just a few who may have disabilities.

Some have little time to cache - a quick grab at lunch or when going out on errands is the only caching they have time for.

None of these scenarios require uninspired hides. A 1/1 film canister in a parking lot can be lame, or it can be great, depending on how much effort is put forth by the hider. Effort = Reward, a concept lost on some. So long as we, as a community, continue to lovingly embrace lameness, then those hiders who create lameness will have no incentive to strive for excellence.

[+DrAwKwArD]

Who'd have imagined, though, how out of hand these lamp skirt caches really are?

When cachers with 10 finds start saying, "Nice hide, although I knew just where to

look since I've found this type before," then I think we'll have reason to complain.

[+TrailGators]

Who'd have imagined, though, how out of hand these lamp skirt caches really are?

When cachers with 10 finds start saying, "Nice hide, although I knew just where to

look since I've found this type before," then I think we'll have reason to complain.

I totally agree. The fact is that there are more and more people that could care less about placing a cache that is enjoyable for a larger array of people. I typically cache with a large variety of people and the dismay is increasing. I hear it all the time. So the way I see it there are an increasing number of people that would like to see people "try" to make their cache as enjoyable as possible. What the heck is wrong with asking people to "try" to do this?

[+sbell111]

... Back into my blocked posters list. In you go, this won't hurt a bit. *PLONK* Have yourself a nice weekend.

found it and added that one and only name who needed to it.

I feel better, already.

[+sbell111]

You know, my first find was a full-sized cache under a pile of sticks, ten feet off a trail, 1/4 mile from my car. So was my second find and my third and my fourth and my sixth. I guess that I should hate every one of these that I find now, since they are clearly trite.

Edited January 7, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

You know, my first find was a full-sized cache under a pile of sticks, ten feet off a trail, 1/4 mile from my car. So was my second find and my third and my fourth and my sixth. I guess that I should hate every one of these that I find now, since they are clearly trite.

So the trail was in a really boring place like a Wal-Mart parking lot?

[+sbell111]

You know, my first find was a full-sized cache under a pile of sticks, ten feet off a trail, 1/4 mile from my car. So was my second find and my third and my fourth and my sixth. I guess that I should hate every one of these that I find now, since they are clearly trite.

So the trail was in a really boring place like a Wal-Mart parking lot?

Honestly, if you see one tree, you've kind of seen them all.

[+briansnat]

I believe urban caching has a finite amount of caches that can be done that have something resembling quality. At some point all the places worth visiting have a cache placed, so by default there is only the less desirable locations left to hide caches at. Its at that point "most" new caches in the city will likely not be worth hunting for unless homeless camps, parking lots, and random empty lots with garbage are what you like to see.

 

I don't buy this. I live in the second most densely cached state in the US and I'm constantly amazed at the unique and interesting places my fellow geocachers come up with.

 

I personally have more ideas for places right now than I have the time and money to hide.

 

Maybe someday all the good spots will be taken, but for now all people have to do is a little homework to come up with interesting places to hide caches.

[Clan Riffster]

You know, my first find was a full-sized cache under a pile of sticks, ten feet off a trail, 1/4 mile from my car. So was my second find and my third and my fourth and my sixth. I guess that I should hate every one of these that I find now, since they are clearly trite.

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

[+TrailGators]

You know, my first find was a full-sized cache under a pile of sticks, ten feet off a trail, 1/4 mile from my car. So was my second find and my third and my fourth and my sixth. I guess that I should hate every one of these that I find now, since they are clearly trite.

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

[+TetrAmigos]

Classic!

[+sbell111]

You know, my first find was a full-sized cache under a pile of sticks, ten feet off a trail, 1/4 mile from my car. So was my second find and my third and my fourth and my sixth. I guess that I should hate every one of these that I find now, since they are clearly trite.

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

I'm glad this thread was bumped, as I missed your reply.

 

The ammo cans that I referred to were neither cleverly hidden nor in especially scenic locations. Face it, the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations.

Edited January 7, 2007 by sbell111

[+The Leprechauns]

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

Ask and ye shall receive. One of the best "trolling" threads of all time. Most of the early posters were in on the joke.

 

It also proves that we've been debating the same ol' stuff since that thread from back in November of 2002.

[+sbell111]

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

Ask and ye shall receive. One of the best "trolling" threads of all time. Most of the early posters were in on the joke.

 

It also proves that we've been debating the same ol' stuff since that thread from back in November of 2002.

Wow. I remember the thread, but didn't think it was THAT old.

 

(Just for that, you're going back on 'ignore'. PLUNK!!)

Edited January 8, 2007 by sbell111

[+Harry Dolphin]

Obviously, we need to use the word 'lame' instead of 'urban'. There's a mighty big difference!

We went looking for four caches in NYC today. That's urban!

The first was muggled before it was published, and rehidden. It brought us to the oldest house in NYC. Searched high and low, but couldn't find it. Might have been muggled again. Dunno.

The second cache noted "I'm surprised that there have been no caches hidden in the park." This was the eighth here. The rest have been muggled, and maybe this one too. Great park, and scenic views! But a tough crowd after hours.

The third is in the Bronx. (To quote Ogden Nash: The Bronx? No thonx.) Twenty feet up the hill behind the white building that says "Private Property No Dumping." "Disposabe Tupperware container." Found this one! Fortunately, I didn't trip over the rat poison box.

Then there was number 4!!!! Also the Bronx. Ah, this is what geocaching is all about! Great views in a place that I would never have gone to. Nice hide. Loved it!!!!

Four urban caches. One incredibly lame. Two in great locations, but probably not well hidden considering the area. And one that was spectacular!

If you want to talk about lame caches, call them lame caches. It takes a good cache hider in a city to show you good urban caches.

[+sbell111]

Many people forget that it also takes a decision to enjoy oneself. It constantly surprises me that there are so many people who almost seem like they're trying hard not to have fun.

Edited January 8, 2007 by sbell111

[+TrailGators]

The ammo cans that I referred to were neither cleverly hidden nor in especially scenic locations. Face it, the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations.

I think we agree on something. However, if someone takes me to a scenic location, I could care less if the cache is hidden under a pile a sticks or rocks. They made my day with the location! So I guess I am a location cacher. I found a cache near an old mine yesterday. That one was really cool! I can't wait to find the next one like that!

[Mr.Yuck]

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

Ask and ye shall receive. One of the best "trolling" threads of all time. Most of the early posters were in on the joke.

 

It also proves that we've been debating the same ol' stuff since that thread from back in November of 2002.

 

I always like when the old 2002 threads are linked to. Who are these posters? Where the heck did they disappear to? Why don't they come back? Except maybe for Welch, and The Leprechauns. And of course you have to have banned Upinyachit AKA Broncoholics in there.

 

EDIT: Since there has been at least 6 posts to this thread, after I made 12 seperate references to Nazi Germany in an attempt to invoke Goodwins law to kill the thread, I edited it out. Because it's obvious people reading it think I'm just whacked. Which is true, for the most part.

Edited January 8, 2007 by TheWhiteUrkel

[+TrailGators]

Why is it we never see a "I hate ammo cans cleverly hidden in scenic locations" threads? Snoog? Can you get the ball rolling?

Ask and ye shall receive. One of the best "trolling" threads of all time. Most of the early posters were in on the joke.

 

It also proves that we've been debating the same ol' stuff since that thread from back in November of 2002.

This post from that thread gave me a good chuckle.....

[+sbell111]

The ammo cans that I referred to were neither cleverly hidden nor in especially scenic locations. Face it, the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations.

I think we agree on something. However, if someone takes me to a scenic location, I could care less if the cache is hidden under a pile a sticks or rocks. They made my day with the location! So I guess I am a location cacher. I found a cache near an old mine yesterday. That one was really cool! I can't wait to find the next one like that!

If you are saying that the inclusion of tree automatically makes a location scenic and the cache 'better', than I don't believe that we agree.

[+TrailGators]

The ammo cans that I referred to were neither cleverly hidden nor in especially scenic locations. Face it, the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations.

I think we agree on something. However, if someone takes me to a scenic location, I could care less if the cache is hidden under a pile a sticks or rocks. They made my day with the location! So I guess I am a location cacher. I found a cache near an old mine yesterday. That one was really cool! I can't wait to find the next one like that!

If you are saying that the inclusion of tree automatically makes a location scenic and the cache 'better', than I don't believe that we agree.

I was agreeing with your statement: "the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations."

[+sbell111]

I was agreeing with your statement: "the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations."

I misunderstood. I apologize.

[+TrailGators]

I was agreeing with your statement: "the great bulk of caches have never been cleverly hidden or in scenic locations."

I misunderstood. I apologize.

No problem.

[Via Con Ardillos]

Make them illegal, i like long hikes in the woods to find a small or a regular sized cache that actually holds something in it other than a log book.

[+sbell111]

Make them illegal, i like long hikes in the woods to find a small or a regular sized cache that actually holds something in it other than a log book.

Is it your position that the game should only be what you like, or is it OK that other people get to find caches that they like, also?

[CoyoteRed]

I think some folks--or maybe it's most folks--never knew that one of the most celebrated caches of all time was an urban cache. Hmmm... The final was a park-n-grab, too. I suppose you could even call the final a parking lot cache.

 

I don't think anyone, expect maybe a hiking zealot, could call Tube Torcher lame. It was a very well though-out, themed adventure. It was challenging, but doable. Though listed as a regular, the container was on the large side so there was plenty of booty.

 

The point being an urban cache can be more than what most seem to think is doable. They just need to use a bit of imagination.

[+TrailGators]

I think some folks--or maybe it's most folks--never knew that one of the most celebrated caches of all time was an urban cache. Hmmm... The final was a park-n-grab, too. I suppose you could even call the final a parking lot cache.

 

I don't think anyone, expect maybe a hiking zealot, could call Tube Torcher lame. It was a very well though-out, themed adventure. It was challenging, but doable. Though listed as a regular, the container was on the large side so there was plenty of booty.

 

The point being an urban cache can be more than what most seem to think is doable. They just need to use a bit of imagination.

I agree. I have found many fun and imaginative urbans. The problem now is that they are mixed in with so many unimaginative urbans, which I don't enjoy finding at all. I wouldn't mind people hiding these numbers caches IF there was an "easy" way for me to filter my PQ to find the recommended caches. I still think that the majority of people would recommend the fun and imaginative caches. This feature would also end the angst and provide a more enjoyable experience for the non-numbers cachers!

[+Techcaching]

The first lightpole skirt cache I found I thought was very cool -- I'd never seen it and didn't know you could hide stuff under there. It was also in the parking lot of a park, not a store, and it was the first stage of a multi that was in the park, not a micro cache unto itself. Now, though, I don't even bother with them.

 

The plus side is, now that I know about the skirts and most non-cachers don't, I've used them to hide my keys when I want to lock my car and don't want to carry them (e.g. jogging)

 

Now I know where to look for car keys

 

Seriously though. I have seen people get pretty creative with those skirts.

 

We did a cache about 2 weeks ago that upon walking up appeard to be another "under the skirt" cache. but was actually a painted magnetic strip of metal that blended in almost perfectly to the pole itself and took us a good 15 min before I accidently smacked it right off the pole.

[+JimmyEv]

Obviously, we need to use the word 'lame' instead of 'urban'. There's a mighty big difference!

We went looking for four caches in NYC today. That's urban!

The first was muggled before it was published, and rehidden. It brought us to the oldest house in NYC. Searched high and low, but couldn't find it. Might have been muggled again. Dunno.

The second cache noted "I'm surprised that there have been no caches hidden in the park." This was the eighth here. The rest have been muggled, and maybe this one too. Great park, and scenic views! But a tough crowd after hours.

The third is in the Bronx. (To quote Ogden Nash: The Bronx? No thonx.) Twenty feet up the hill behind the white building that says "Private Property No Dumping." "Disposabe Tupperware container." Found this one! Fortunately, I didn't trip over the rat poison box.

Then there was number 4!!!! Also the Bronx. Ah, this is what geocaching is all about! Great views in a place that I would never have gone to. Nice hide. Loved it!!!!

Four urban caches. One incredibly lame. Two in great locations, but probably not well hidden considering the area. And one that was spectacular!

If you want to talk about lame caches, call them lame caches. It takes a good cache hider in a city to show you good urban caches.

 

What's commonly being referred to as 'urban' caches aren't urban at all --- they're suburban. And suburban caches are about as inspired as their surroundings (IF they're not in a park). There aren't any Walmarts in the urban core of Houston, I doubt there's many urban Walmarts at all. Urban caches are usually in interesting places, as you pointed out. Sometimes in 'uncomfortable' areas to some people, but mostly interesting.

[+sbell111]

What's commonly being referred to as 'urban' caches aren't urban at all --- they're suburban. And suburban caches are about as inspired as their surroundings (IF they're not in a park). There aren't any Walmarts in the urban core of Houston, I doubt there's many urban Walmarts at all. Urban caches are usually in interesting places, as you pointed out. Sometimes in 'uncomfortable' areas to some people, but mostly interesting.

You make the same generalities as the other people who insist that only there was of playing the game is appropriate. A sweeping statement that all suburban locations (except in parks) are uninteresting simply doesn't compute for me (or, I expect, with the great numbers of other cachers who choose to live in the 'uninspired and uninteresting' suburbs). Edited January 8, 2007 by sbell111

[+Renegade Knight]

...Here in Northren MN where there are 10000+ lakes 20000+ boat landings and miles and miles of woods to hide good caches in, we still get a few like this under the lamp pole skirt. ...

 

So the lakes and boat landings get boring and itching the skeeter bites gets old making the lamp skirts the rarer cache? I can digg it.

Edited January 8, 2007 by Renegade Knight

[muttz]

I didn't have any idea that little old me mentioning about how some people just might not be able to get out that far in the woods would inspire the attitude that it did. I suppose to clarify, not that it really needs it, I was thinking about the palcement of a few easy caches for people of varying degrees of disability. However, there would be nothing that I could do to stop those who are in great shape from adding to their numbers by visiting an easy cache that I may place.

 

I kind of figured that there wouldn't be a huge population of geocachers that are extremely handicapped. I have experienced disability, and work with those who are at varying levels of disability. Sometimes it takes someone to facilitate a disabled person to a degree so that they can reach their full potential. What I mean is that we help get 'em started, they get stronger, more experienced, more flexible, get more stamina, all the while getting to a less of a degree of disability due to some slight facilitating.

 

I need easy caches right now, and I am thankful for the people that have placed them. I hope to go find an easy one this week with my wife by my side. I know we can't convey every detail of every thought that we are having on this matter in these little missives that we create in this forum. I have no intent of offending anyone, but I am having a difficult time understanding why some people are getting, what seems to be, actually mad about easy caches.

 

So, I suppose that once I get back to bench pressing over four hundred pounds I'm just gonna have to start thumpin' some heads until you see it my way. <-----In case you don't realize it, I was joking.

 

As an aside: I was previewing my post before I placed it and discovered that I left the letter T off of the word thumpin'. Now that would have made for a very humorous post.

[+JimmyEv]

You make the same generalities as the other people who insist that only there was of playing the game is appropriate. A sweeping statement that all suburban locations (except in parks) are uninteresting simply doesn't compute for me (or, I expect, with the great numbers of other cachers who choose to live in the 'uninspired and uninteresting' suburbs).

 

You're right, that was too sweeping. I really didn't mean to attack the 'burbs. They tend to have the highest saturation and therefore the highest number of what some people think are 'lame' caches. It's just the terminology in the forums is bugging me. The cache that started this whole thread is 25 miles out of the city. Not very urban.

[+sbell111]

You make the same generalities as the other people who insist that only there was of playing the game is appropriate. A sweeping statement that all suburban locations (except in parks) are uninteresting simply doesn't compute for me (or, I expect, with the great numbers of other cachers who choose to live in the 'uninspired and uninteresting' suburbs).

 

You're right, that was too sweeping. I really didn't mean to attack the 'burbs. They tend to have the highest saturation and therefore the highest number of what some people think are 'lame' caches. It's just the terminology in the forums is bugging me. The cache that started this whole thread is 25 miles out of the city. Not very urban.

I actually shouldn't have dumped you in with those that insist on changing the game to their own preferences. I'll fix it.

[+TheAlabamaRambler]

You make the same generalities as the other people who insist that only there was of playing the game is appropriate. A sweeping statement that all suburban locations (except in parks) are uninteresting simply doesn't compute for me (or, I expect, with the great numbers of other cachers who choose to live in the 'uninspired and uninteresting' suburbs).

 

You're right, that was too sweeping. I really didn't mean to attack the 'burbs. They tend to have the highest saturation and therefore the highest number of what some people think are 'lame' caches. It's just the terminology in the forums is bugging me. The cache that started this whole thread is 25 miles out of the city. Not very urban.

 

Emphasis added.

 

So you think saturation comes from a bunch of us scurrying around hiding lame caches?

 

Have you considered that there are so many urban micros because that's what we like to hunt?

 

It's pretty lame to let the few vocal micro-haters in these forums blind you to the fact that the rest of us hide and hunt what we like!

 

If micros are indeed being spewed, it's because cachers like spewed micros, unless you believe they are being forced by aliens to hide things against their will!

[+team lagonda]

INSTAFAR,,im sure there are those who think a giant ammo box laying in the middle of the forest floor arent particualy clever also..for a newbee the micro might seem way more clever than that but now the cats outta the bag the newbee just lost the chance to find one himself for the first time..anyways , i sappose thats why theres a difficuty rating for the caches,,you mite wanna move up to the two star ones..

Edited January 8, 2007 by team lagonda

[+sbell111]

Good point. We all need to remember that we can put in a little effort to weed out caches that we won't like. If you don't like lame, urban micros, you can run your PQs to not give you micros that are less than 2/1.5. After you find all of the remaining caches, then take a look at the ones you weeded out to see if any are 'worthy' of your time.

Edited January 8, 2007 by sbell111

[Clan Riffster]

So you think saturation comes from a bunch of us scurrying around hiding lame caches?

 

Have you considered that there are so many urban micros because that's what we like to hunt?

 

It's pretty lame to let the few vocal micro-haters in these forums blind you to the fact that the rest of us hide and hunt what we like!

Saturation does not determine lameness. Uninspired hiders determine lameness. Saturation can come about as a side effect of uninspired hiders running around plopping out carp, but it can also come about as a result of inspired hiders concentrating on a particular geographic location. Just because there are a bunch of caches in a particular region, does not mean they have to be lame.

 

Combine a carpy container, (film canister), with a carpy location, (parking lot), then sprinkle in an uninspired write up, (My daddy got me this here film canister for my birthday. I hid it at Wally World cuz that there's my favoritest store), and you have a lame cache. When I see these pop up, I often ask myself, why would someone bother to place such a banal cache? Is it because they prefer the uninspired, or is it because they are one slice short of a loaf and don't have the capacity to recognize the difference between quality vs. quantity? A few clicks reveals their find history, and so far, in every single case, their most gushing logs are reserved for caches that are nothing like the carp that they've hidden. This would seem to indicate that carp is not what they prefer.

 

I would accept that argument if I saw a bunch of logs similar to the faux one listed below:

"Oh my God!!! I never knew this parking lot existed! I usually shop at the Super Bullseye next door and didn't even think about there being a Wally World. That lamp post is the most beautiful one in the entire lot! The sheen of the asphalt added to our inner glow as we removed the film canister from it's amazingly clever hiding spot. The scent of exhaust emissions mingling with the gentle sounds of horns & revving engines really soothed our souls. Thank you for bringing us to this wonderful spot!"

Oddly enough, what I see are a bunch of "TNLNSL. Or maybe it's not so odd after all.

 

If micros are indeed being spewed, it's because cachers like spewed micros, unless you believe they are being forced by aliens to hide things against their will!

Stoopid Aliens!

[+Team Perks]

Really, it's all about perspective and attitude.

 

Cities tend to be fairly densely populated with caches; that's a given. People tend to hide caches near where they live, and well, most people live in or around cities. Being a diverse group of people, there are going to be a diverse group of caches. And more saturated areas are, by definition, going to have more lame caches (numerically, at least) than less saturated areas. While the percentage of "good" vs. "bad" caches might not be different between an area that has 100 caches and one that has 1000 caches, having to weed out the percentage of caches that are dull to find those that are interesting.

 

To be honest, I don't particularly mind the lamppost hides. At least they're easy. There have been many times where, after getting DNF after DNF after DNF, I've been thrilled to pull into a parking lot and see my GPS point straight toward that lamppost. After a series of stunning defeats, even a cheesy 1/1 outside the local supermarket can help get my spirits back up.

 

When I first started caching, I had just moved to a new town. Finding the lame urban/suburban/whatever hides really helped me figure out how to get around. I even stumbled across some great shops and restaurants in my travels. Were most of the caches I found what I would consider to be highly inspired? No. Am I glad I went out and looked for them anyway? You bet. Did I learn something new and unique about my hometown as I went out searching? Absolutely.

 

Don't like the lame urban hides? There are still ways to make them fun. I generally don't cache close to my current home because 1) my experience has been that the caches aren't that interesting and 2) I know the area well and I rarely discover something new. But occasionally I'll get a couple of fellow caching friends together and we'll make a day of trying to get a bunch of them. To face and embrace the lameness, if you will. Perhaps we'll grab dinner and beers afterwards and have fun trying to decide which of them was the silliest hide. Even if the caches aren't all that interesting, I can truthfully admit that I had fun.

[+TrailGators]

Really, it's all about perspective and attitude.

I also think that every cacher also has a saturation point for a particular kind of cache. You make like lame posts now but will you still feel that way after you find 100 or 500 or 1000 more of them? I will admit that there are some people who can be entertained by watching paint dry or watching grass grow but eventually all of us hit a limit where a repetitive activity starts to become really boring.

 

I also know that my likelihood of becoming bored is greatly reduced as the creativity or beauty of a cache location increases. I have never become bored with caches in scenic locations or caches that are hidden in a clever way!

Edited January 8, 2007 by TrailGators

[+Team Perks]

You make like lame posts now but will you still feel that way after you find 100 or 500 or 1000 more of them? I will admit that there are some people who can be entertained by watching paint dry or watching grass grow but eventually all of us hit a limit where a repetitive activity starts to become really boring.

I think I can vouch that I've found my share of lamppost caches. Sometimes several in the same Target parking lot (whee!).

 

And when I do become bored of them again (as I certainly have in the past), I am under no obligation to keep looking for them. That's the great part of caching. When I get tired of searching in the city, I can decide to go find some caches along a new hiking trail. Or hop in the Jeep and see if there are any new caches along my favorite 4x4 trails. Or get on the bike and find some caches along the bike path by the beach.

 

The fact that the lamppost hides are still out there does nothing to detract from my ability to seek out and find other types of caches in more scenic locales.

[+JimmyEv]

Really, it's all about perspective and attitude.

 

Cities tend to be fairly densely populated with caches; that's a given. People tend to hide caches near where they live, and well, most people live in or around cities. Being a diverse group of people, there are going to be a diverse group of caches. And more saturated areas are, by definition, going to have more lame caches (numerically, at least) than less saturated areas. While the percentage of "good" vs. "bad" caches might not be different between an area that has 100 caches and one that has 1000 caches, having to weed out the percentage of caches that are dull to find those that are interesting.

 

To be honest, I don't particularly mind the lamppost hides. At least they're easy. There have been many times where, after getting DNF after DNF after DNF, I've been thrilled to pull into a parking lot and see my GPS point straight toward that lamppost. After a series of stunning defeats, even a cheesy 1/1 outside the local supermarket can help get my spirits back up.

 

When I first started caching, I had just moved to a new town. Finding the lame urban/suburban/whatever hides really helped me figure out how to get around. I even stumbled across some great shops and restaurants in my travels. Were most of the caches I found what I would consider to be highly inspired? No. Am I glad I went out and looked for them anyway? You bet. Did I learn something new and unique about my hometown as I went out searching? Absolutely.

 

Don't like the lame urban hides? There are still ways to make them fun. I generally don't cache close to my current home because 1) my experience has been that the caches aren't that interesting and 2) I know the area well and I rarely discover something new. But occasionally I'll get a couple of fellow caching friends together and we'll make a day of trying to get a bunch of them. To face and embrace the lameness, if you will. Perhaps we'll grab dinner and beers afterwards and have fun trying to decide which of them was the silliest hide. Even if the caches aren't all that interesting, I can truthfully admit that I had fun.

 

Said much better than my pathetic attempt. 'Lameness' is in the eye of the beholder. What I think is lame varies from day-to-day. When heading home in the car, wearing clothes saturated with sweat after hiking 3 miles in 98 degree heat to grab a cache, a little micro under the lamp post at Walmart feels good. But if it's the 15th lamp post I did that day, then I might think it's lame. If I drive between park and grabs, I think they're lame; If I cycle between them I think they're cool.

 

Regardless, we've been given the tools to weed out what we don't like, or to find whatever we're looking for that particular day, if we'd use them. If Groundspeak gave us a magic button that would make all lame (however we define it) caches disappear, people would still complain about lame caches.

 

Back to my OT point about urban being a misnomer...

[+TrailGators]

You make like lame posts now but will you still feel that way after you find 100 or 500 or 1000 more of them? I will admit that there are some people who can be entertained by watching paint dry or watching grass grow but eventually all of us hit a limit where a repetitive activity starts to become really boring.

The fact that the lamppost hides are still out there does nothing to detract from my ability to seek out and find other types of caches in more scenic locales.

That is what I'm doing now. Because there is no easy way to ignore lame post caches and the like, I pretty much have to ignore all urban caches to avoid them..... Edited January 8, 2007 by TrailGators

[+sbell111]

You make like lame posts now but will you still feel that way after you find 100 or 500 or 1000 more of them? I will admit that there are some people who can be entertained by watching paint dry or watching grass grow but eventually all of us hit a limit where a repetitive activity starts to become really boring.

The fact that the lamppost hides are still out there does nothing to detract from my ability to seek out and find other types of caches in more scenic locales.

That is what I'm doing now. Because there is no easy way to ignore lame post caches and the like, I pretty much have to ignore all urban caches to avoid them.....

You could certainly ignore all micros with a low difficulty/terrain rating. This would get rid of 99% of the caches that you rail about. It would also sort out some caches that you would like. Luckily, it would leave in lots that would have a high likelihood of providing you amusement. Once you are done with all of those (if ever), you can take another look at the ones you sorted out to find the pearls. I bet that you would never get around to them and you would never miss them.

[+TrailGators]

You make like lame posts now but will you still feel that way after you find 100 or 500 or 1000 more of them? I will admit that there are some people who can be entertained by watching paint dry or watching grass grow but eventually all of us hit a limit where a repetitive activity starts to become really boring.

The fact that the lamppost hides are still out there does nothing to detract from my ability to seek out and find other types of caches in more scenic locales.

That is what I'm doing now. Because there is no easy way to ignore lame post caches and the like, I pretty much have to ignore all urban caches to avoid them.....

You could certainly ignore all micros with a low difficulty/terrain rating. This would get rid of 99% of the caches that you rail about. It would also sort out some caches that you would like. Luckily, it would leave in lots that would have a high likelihood of providing you amusement. Once you are done with all of those (if ever), you can take another look at the ones you sorted out to find the pearls. I bet that you would never get around to them and you would never miss them.

I wouldn't say that I'm railing. I thought I was stating that I was bored with certain types of ubiquitous caches. Now I'll get recommendations from people on good urbans. I still enjoy creative ones. If one isn't recommended I'll ignore it.